A Concerted Effort to Suppress Vaccine Research & Destroy an Academic Career

In 2006, Judy Wilyman, then a student at the University of Wollongong, was awarded high distinction for her master’s thesis, a critique of the Australian government’s whooping cough vaccination policy. She then expanded her research into a detailed examination of how the pharmaceutical industry captured the Australian state. Her PhD. thesis, titled “A Critical Analysis of the Australian Government’s Rationale For  Vaccination Policy” (2015).

 “It is important that independent research is carried out to assess whether all the vaccines being recommended today are safe, effective, and necessary for the protection of the community. It is also important to have comprehensive evidence that it is safe to combine multiple vaccines in the developing bodies of infants. The framework for undone science is used to analyse the Australian government’s claim that the benefits of vaccines far outweigh the risks.

Whilst the government claims serious adverse events to vaccines are rare this is not supported by adequate scientific evidence due to the shortcomings in clinical trials and long-term surveillance of health outcomes of recipients…

 This investigation demonstrates that not all vaccines have been demonstrated to be safe, effective or necessary. It also concludes that the government’s claim that the benefits of vaccines far outweigh the risks cannot be sustained due to the gaps in the scientific knowledge resulting from unfunded research and the inadequate monitoring of adverse events after vaccination.”

Her PhD thesis became a flashpoint for Australian vaccine front groups, such as Australian Skeptics and Friends of Science in Medicine who have waged a vitriolic campaign against her aimed at destroying her academic career.

Australia’s Vaccine Policy Enforcement Brigade

Dr. Cunningham

Opposition to the subject matter of Dr. Wilyman’s thesis was gathering storm even before she had submitted her PhD. thesis to the university. She became the target of an orchestrated character assassination campaign launched by Dr. John Cunningham, an orthopedic surgeon, who is a spokesman for the vaccine lobbying group Stop the Australian Vaccine Network (SAVN). SAVN’s stated mission is to “relegate anti-vaccination campaigners to irrelevance” by trashing the reputation of scientists who question vaccine safety, and undermining the credibility of their work, in order to prevent a serious scientific debate about vaccine safety. SAVN strongly supported Australia’s “No Jabs/No Pay” policy.  In 2014, Dr. Cunningham solicited complaints of unfounded allegations of academic misconduct against her to the Wollongong University and Rupert Murdoch’s media purveyors of vaccine propaganda unleashed their infamous defamatory assault tactics against Dr. Wilyman. ABC News (Australia) reported that “a pair of [unnamed] medical experts has lodged a claim of academic misconduct” and demanded that the university rescind Dr. Wilyman’s thesis. ABC also reported that the Australian Medical Association had filed a complaint against her. Following an unwarranted investigation, Dr. Wilyman was found not guilty of academic misconduct. Vice-Chancellor for Research, Dr. Judy Raper acknowledged that “the investigation should not have happened” and that the academic process had been misused. (May 2015). That did not end the Murdoch orchestrated furor. In January 2016, Murdoch’s paper, The Australian was on the warpath: the headline shouted: “Judy Wilyman’s Anti-Vaccine PhD Not Included in Uni’s Review”:

The University of Wollongong has relented to intense pressure from the scientific and medical communities and will undertake a review of the awarding of PhDs at the institution, but not one conferred last week that sharply criticises the government’s ­vaccination policy, Sixty-five of the university’s academic signed a public statement urging parents to vaccinate their children”.

A few days later, The Australian continued the harangue: Dr. Wilyman and Professor Martin have both been targeted by a series of complaints to the university”… Dr. Cunningham was again in the forefront of an attempt to prevent Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, an American osteopath and emergency physician from lecturing in Australia. SAVN ran a social media campaign: Stop Tenpenny. [i]

Another spokesman for SAVN is its administrator, Dr. David Hawkes (Dr. Dave), who works for Victorian Cytology Service (VCS) which receives $24 million annually from the government to maintain a register of HPV vaccination uptake and to send out “reminder letters” to thousands of girls and young women, soliciting the vaccine.[ii]

Dr. David Hawkes

VCS is also conducting a clinical trial (COMPASS) on behalf of Roche Pharmaceuticals testing its DNA screening test for HPV against the reliable Pap test, which is recommended whether or not one is vaccinated against HPV.  Roche’s DNA test has a problem: it has been shown to elicit a high false/positive rate that would result in women who falsely tested positive for HPV infection, would be subjected to unnecessary invasive “treatment”.

Given that 90% of HPV infections clear up “without any intervention” (WHO, 2016), and given that no one knows how long the vaccine provides protection, one is hard-pressed to justify the vaccine, especially since cervical cancer does not show up until a woman is over 49 years of age.[iii] Dr. Hawkes is an active member on several advisory committees covering the implementation of the new Roche Screening Program. As “a passionate advocate for vaccination” Hawkes devotes a great deal of time letter-writing in defense of vaccination policies, berating anyone who is skeptical about vaccine safety.

Scientific Objectivity, Impartiality, & Uncertainty Are Systematically Drowned Out by a Thought Police

“debate in science is not only a common occurrence but a fundamental tenet of the scientific community, it only works when divergent opinions can be heard. When those who hold an opposing opinion are denigrated and/or marginalized by those holding the majority opinion such as in the issue of vaccination, where cultural authority for the issue is owned by the profession of medicine, both science and the public lose”. (Leonard Vernon


The work of legitimate scientists who question the claimed, but scientifically unsubstantiated safety of childhood vaccination schedules is methodically suppressed. Their work is not published in widely read, high impact medical journals inasmuch as those journals, as well as their editors, have grown dependent on the financial largesse of the drug/vaccine industry.[iv] Correspondingly, evidence of scientific fraud in widely cited published reports by CDC and CDC-commissioned scientists is not reported;[v] neither in the professional medical literature nor in mainstream media outlets. [Read AHRP, Betrayal of Public Trust & Institutional Corruption, Appendix 9]

At best, the work of independent scientists whose research contradicts vaccine orthodoxy is ignored by mainstream medicine and the media, thereby preventing those scientists’ concerns from reaching the public. At worst, the work of honest scientists is disparaged and ridiculed, and the scientists are viciously attacked by a flock of industry front organizations and zealous bloggers who serve as pharmaceutical industry guardians and cheering squads. Below is a sample list of vaccine propagandists who pose as “independent” voices, while concealing their stealth funding sources. Even the choice for their public identity –i.e., their nom de guerre – is calculated to deceive.

Scientists, Doctors, Journalists & Parents Who Express Safety Concerns Are Attacked

The guardians of the vaccine industry are intent on silencing anyone who expresses concern about the safety of administering untested, multiple clusters of multi-virus vaccines simultaneously to infants and young children, or anyone who questions the necessity of exposing infants in highly developed industrialized countries, to so many vaccines for diseases that pose no risk for them. Such concerns are deemed heretical, and doctors, scientists, or journalists who raise such concerns are subjected to a barrage of personal attacks on his/her character. The onslaught of public attacks is deliberately intended to disqualify critics and damage professional reputations. The truth of the allegations is irrelevant, what matters is public perception, which has been methodically manipulated by the deluge of attacks.

“Ultimately, society must recognize that science is not a democracy… what can we do to hasten the funeral of antivaccination campaigns?” (Dr. Gregory Poland, editor-in-chief, Vaccine, New England Journal of Medicine, 2011 )


Luc Montagnier, MD, the French virologist who headed the Pasteur Institute whose team identified the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in 1983, leading to the development of treatments against AIDS.[vi] Dr. Montagnier is the co-founder and co-director of the World Foundation for AIDS Research and Prevention which was a founding partner of the International Reference Center Chantal Biya (IRCCB) in Cameroon. IRCCB is the only research institution in central Africa with technology and expertise to monitor people with HIV. In 2008, Dr. Montagnier shared the Nobel Prize in medicine with Dr. Francoise Barré-Sinoussim for their discovery of HIV.[vii]

When Dr. Montagnier embraced theories that do not conform to orthodox mainstream medicine – which is dominated by commercial interests – he incurred the wrath of mainstream scientists, most of whom are stakeholders in profit-focused medicine. They denounced his embrace of “theories that are far from the scientific mainstream”, such as his research into electromagnetic waves (that he says) emanate from the highly diluted DNA of various pathogens.

“What we have found is that DNA produces structural changes in water, which persist at very high dilutions, and which lead to resonant electromagnetic signals that we can measure. Not all DNA produces signals that we can detect with our device. The high-intensity signals come from bacterial and viral DNA.”[viii]

His support for the use of antioxidants and nutritional supplements to fight against AIDS incurred his critics’ condemnation and censure; they demanded his ouster from the IRCCB. In an interview in Science[ix] (December 2010) titled, “French Nobelist Escapes ‘Intellectual Terror’ to Pursue Radical Ideas in China”, Dr. Montagnier lauded Dr. Jacques Benveniste (who died in 2004) as “a modern Galileo”.  He praised his research on “water memory”; research that had been ridiculed as homeopathy. He noted that: “some have reproduced Benveniste’s results, but they are afraid to publish it because of the intellectual terror from people who don’t understand it”.

According to Nature (2012), his critics are aghast that his research into high dilutions supports homeopathic medicine – which the British Medical Association called “witchcraft”. Dr. Montagnier’s research suggests a link between changes in intestinal flora and immunity:

Signals coming from bacterial DNA in the plasma of many patients with autism, and also in most, if not all, patients with Alzheimer, Parkinson’s disease, and multiple sclerosisit is quite possible that products from gut bacteria end up in the plasma and cause damage to the brain”.

Vaccine ideologues are exceedingly critical of this line of unconventional research; they worry that Dr. Montagnier’s status as Nobel Prize winner may lend credibility to outlier approaches to autism research that may result in findings that undermine mainstream vaccine orthodoxy. In fact, vaccine propaganda notwithstanding, numerous studies across the globe have confirmed Dr. Wakefield’s original research findings; namely, that abnormal intestinal function plays an important role in the etiology of autism.

“The last straw for Montagnier’s critics seems to have been his appearance in May alongside vaccine sceptics at a conference in Chicago, Illinois, organized by US patient-advocacy groups Autism One and Generation Rescue.

Montagnier’s talk, on his hypothesis that bacterial infections may be one of many causes of autism spectrum disorder, states: ‘There is in the blood of most autistic children — but not in healthy children — DNA sequences that emit, in certain conditions, electromagnetic waves.’

Montagnier defends his research, pointing out that “some clinicians have observed improvements in symptoms of autism after long-term treatment with antibiotics. Many parents have observed a temporal association, which does not mean causation, between a vaccination and the appearance of autism symptoms. Presumably vaccination, especially against multiple antigens, could be a trigger of a pre-existing pathological situation in some children.” (Nature, 2012)

Dr. Montagnier noted that he was unable to obtain funding for his research because “there is a kind of fear around this topic in Europe”. Indeed, the wrath of both mainstream scientists and the internet blogger hit squads were unleashed[x]when he launched a small clinical trial to test the therapeutic effect of long-term antibiotic treatment of children with autism whose plasma showed bacterial DNA.[xi] The trial was funded by the Autism Research Institute.

Dr. Montagnier notes: “Science is full of stories where new discoveries and new emerging concepts are at first badly received by a community of conservative scientists; the only fault to the first proponents is to have been too far in advance … It is therefore of prime importance to study the risk factors, both environmental and genetic, which could be involved in order to prevent them.” (Dr. Montagnier, Autism One)

Dr. Montagnier was viciously attacked and ridiculed by vaccine propagandists

FORBES magazine trashed him “apparently Montagnier has gone off the deep end into pseudoscience…In what seems to be a desperate effort to stay relevant, Montagnier is promoting wild theories with little scientific basis”.

Dr. David Gorski , who knows no shame,  spewed his venomous invectives in his post “Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier Hits a New Low: Age of Autism Rallies to Defend Him”:

Unfortunately, since winning the Nobel Prize, Montagnier’s been on a downward spiral. It didn’t take long after his Nobel acceptance speech for disturbing signs of crankery and quackeryWorse, of late Montagnier has been turning his talents to the treatment of autistic children. Indeed, he’s run [a] highly unethical study of long-term antibiotics as a treatment for autism. His low point came a month ago, when he actually presented his work at the yearly autism ‘biomed’ quackfest Autism One”. (Respectful Insolence, 2012)

At the age of 78, Dr. Montagnier accepted a professorship at the highly regarded Shanghai Jiao Tong University (known as the MIT of China) and a new institute to work on new scientific approaches.

The main topic will be this phenomenon of electromagnetic waves produced by highly diluted DNA in water. We will study both the theoretical basis and the possible applications in medicine.”

Dr. Paul Offit, chief of infectious diseases at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), is a blatant U.S. example of a self-serving academic is who amassed millions of dollars in royalty fees from the rotavirus vaccine (Rotateq) manufactured by Merck. Dr. Offit filed the patent for Rotateq in 1994 with support and funding from Merck, and in 1998, he was appointed the most powerful public health advisory committee in the U.S. government; the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), whose vaccination recommendations are “tantamount to a Federal mandate for vaccine use.” [xii]


Paul Offit, MD

Dr. Offit used his unique position to cast his vote to recommend universal vaccination of infants with the rotavirus vaccine – even before its approval by the FDA. That first rotavirus vaccine (Rotashield, manufactured by Wyeth) was withdrawn within one year of its approval after numerous reports linked the vaccine to infants’ severe bowel obstruction – i.e., intussusception. However, the recommendation by the ACIP ensured that a replacement rotavirus vaccine would be included in the U.S. vaccine schedule. That replacement was RotaTeq, the vaccine whose patent was held by Dr. Offit[xiii](or, as some refer to him, Dr. Profit).

  • In 2008, a business deal was consummated for future royalties from the Rotateq vaccine for which Merck paid $182 million.

Dr. Offit is an unabashed vaccine promoter who assures parents that vaccines are safe by making preposterous claims such as snake oil salesmen used. Dr. Offit has claimed that an infant’s immune system can safely tolerate 10,000 vaccine doses at any one time.[xiv] That outlandish claim is followed by the preposterous defense of aluminum as a valuable nutrient that contributes to the health of infants:

Aluminum quantities fluctuate naturally during normal cellular activity. It is found in all tissues and is also believed to play an important role in the development of a healthy fetus. [Emphasis added]

“Aluminum is found in numerous foods and beverages including fruits and vegetables, beer and wine, seasonings, flour, cereals, nuts, dairy products, baby formulas, and honeyThe aluminum contained in vaccines is similar to that found in a liter (about 1 quart or 32 fluid ounces) of infant formula. While infants receive about 4.4 milligrams* of aluminum in the first six months of life from vaccines, they receive more than that in their diet. Breast-fed infants ingest about 7 milligrams, formula-fed infants ingest about 38 milligrams, and infants who are fed soy formula ingest almost 117 milligrams of aluminum during the first six months of life.” (Vaccine Ingredients – Aluminum, CHOP website)

Dr. Offit castigates those who raise vaccine safety concerns about aluminum or other vaccine ingredients as “irrational”. In an interview published in the Columbia Journal (2012) he accused those who were skeptical about the safety of vaccines, as promoting an “appeal to fear” (which he deemed)  “worse than scientific illiteracy”. He made the preposterous assertion that Wakefield’s paper [Lancet, 1998] “killed children”.

The Wall Street Journal (under the Rupert Murdoch brand) has often provided a forum for Dr. Offit’s views. In an Op-Ed piece titled “The Anti-Vaccination Epidemic” (2014) Dr. Offit did his utmost to generate fear by warning that: “Whooping cough, mumps and measles are making an alarming comeback”, noting that low vaccination rates were prevalent in Beverly Hills and Santa Monica,

some of the wealthiest and most exclusive suburbs in the country…these parents are almost uniformly highly educated. [They] simply don’t fear these diseases anymore. One can only conclude that the outbreak hadn’t been large enough or frightening enough to change behavior—that not enough children had died.”

Dr. Offit is closely aligned with the American Academy of Pediatrics,  (AAP) and is a member of both the Executive Board and Scientific Board of Every Child by Two (ECBT). Both organizations have major financial conflicts of interest; they are financially dependent on CDC and vaccine manufacturers. Their function is to lobby in support of increased budgets for vaccination campaigns and to actively disseminate vaccine propaganda.[xv]

  • The task of such industry front groups is to ensure that “the federal government’s budget [is increased] to keep up with the rising cost of the growing vaccination schedule”. [Read: Betrayal of Public Trust: Appendix 9; Read also, Dissolving Illusions]

The propagandists represent themselves as “vaccine educators” claiming to be reliable sources of scientific-based information; the organizations claim they represent grassroots. In fact, they are all directly or indirectly bankrolled by the drug/vaccine industry. The Office of Medical and Scientific Justice (OMSJ) confirms that: Voices for Vaccine is a Top-down Front Operation Launched by a CDC Partner in 2008; VfV poses as an organization of mothers but is, in fact, a partner of CDC’s Task Force for Global Health:

Voices for Vaccination is a subdivision of Task Force’s Immunizations and Vaccines: Center for Vaccine Equity, Dr Alan R Hinman (a CDC veteran) [is]the director of both the wider operation and Voices for Vaccines  with Task Force for Vaccine Equity’ [which is] funded by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Merck and Novartis.

What’s more, the Task Force’s board of directors is chaired by Jane Fugate Thorpe, a product-liability lawyer representing corporations who (by her own account) has made her reputation “shielding product manufacturers” from individuals such as the concerned parents that Voices for Vaccination purports to represent. This duplicity is confirmed by the fact that it was VFV that started a petition against Jenny McCarthy, which was joined by ScienceBlogs,*[xvi] the mother of a vaccine-injured child (who happens to be a celebrity).

Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI, a bona fide watchdog) described the industry front group, American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) as purveyors of “Voodoo Science, Twisted Consumerism”. Dr. Paul Offit has been a trustee of ACSH since 2007.

The BMJ recently reported that American Academy of Pediatrics, Every Child by Two, and Immunization Action Coalition, were paid fronts of CDC and vaccine manufacturers. What has not been reported in mainstream journals or the media is that CDC, which determines what vaccines to include in the childhood vaccination schedule, fails to disclose to the public that the agency has a financial interest in maximizing utilization of vaccines for which it is reputed to hold 56 patents. [xvii]

Scientists who seek to determine the safety (and hazards) of vaccine ingredients, are labeled “anti-vaccine cranks,” “liars,” “quacks,” “loons,” “incompetent,”  “fraudsters” – simply for daring to pursue avenues of research that focus on unexamined synergistic risks posed by multiple, cumulative vaccine ingredients. Vaccine zealots also lacerate outspoken parents of children who were harmed following vaccination.

  • These children are the embodiment of empirical evidence of serious harmful health impacts resulting from the corporate-driven indiscriminate vaccination policy.
  • Indeed, 5,680 cases of serious vaccine injuries were adjudicated by the special U.S. vaccine court as vaccine-caused, and those vaccine-injured children have been compensated under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Vaccine injuries resulted in the death of 1,236 children.


Concerns About the Safety of Vaccines Were Ignited Long Before Dr. Wakefield Entered the Fray

The polio vaccine, first launched in 1955, is hailed as the greatest medical triumph. However,  contrary to the promulgated myth, both the first polio vaccine developed by Dr. Jonas Salk, and the second polio vaccine developed by Dr. Albert Sabin, have a dubious record of contamination.  Government officials ignored the warnings of Dr. Bernice Eddy,* a virologist and epidemiologist at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) whose research identified the live polio virus in the polio vaccine – not only in the vaccines manufactured by the Cutter Laboratories that caused paralysis in 200 children and the death of 10 children.

Dr. Bernice Eddy, HeroineDr. Eddy was the first scientist to detect a far more serious risk when she injected the mouse polyoma virus in other animals and it caused cancer in those animals.  Her warning, however, was ignored by high ranking government officials who feared that the scandal and subsequent lawsuits would demolish the childhood vaccination program, so they suppressed all evidence of harm. Dr. Eddy was removed from the NIH polio vaccine research unit in an effort aimed at preventing further scientific revelations that raised concerns about the safety of the polio vaccine.

In 1960, Dr. Eddy identified the cancer-causing SV40 monkey virus in the polio vaccine, which should have raised serious concern about the long-term serious consequences. Instead, NIH officials again clamped down on her and tried to prevent her from presenting her research at scientific meetings. They did prevent her from publishing her findings for several years. [*Dr. Bernice Eddy is one of the exemplary professionals on the AHRP Honor Roll. Read The Virus and the Vaccine, 2004]

The day after Christmas, December 26, 2017, The Guardian reported that Government Admits ‘Losing’ Thousands Of Papers From National Archives. Strangely, documents pertaining to “tests on polio vaccines” are among the missing documents dealing with Britain’s long-running territorial disputes regarding the Falklands, Northern Ireland “Troubles”, and the Zinoviev letter – in which MI6 officers plotted to bring about the downfall of the first Labour government.

  • What might be contained in the missing documents dealing with polio vaccine tests that government officials decided to conceal even after decades?


H1N1 flu debacle:
In 1976, the H1N1 flu virus was detected in one U.S. military base (Fort Dix) during a period of three weeks. Thirteen soldiers were hospitalized, and one died. President Ford announced CDC’s assessment and declared a “swine flu epidemic”, initiating a mass-vaccination program. Approximately 45 million people were vaccinated in the U.S. with the “swine flu vaccine” until the government abruptly stopped the H1N1 program when no swine flu cases were detected outside of Fort Dix, and high number of people were found to have contracted Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) following H1N1 flu vaccination. There were 53 deaths attributed to the vaccine. It was later estimated that approximately one GBS case per 100,000 persons vaccinated.[xviii]  In 2009, another H1N1 pandemic was declared globally by governments and public health authorities, but it too never materialized. These government generated vaccine fiascos go a long way in undermining public trust in vaccination pronouncement by public health “authorities”.

In April 1982, a documentary called “Vaccine Roulette” by the investigative reporter Lea Thompson was aired by an NBC TV station in Washington, D.C. The documentary focused on the experience of families whose previously normally developing babies suffered permanent brain damage following vaccination with the DPT vaccine. The documentary won a national Emmy award. Lea Thompson’s work was the driving force behind three acts of Congress.

  • By 2017, more than 1,230 deaths were attributed to vaccines in claims filed with the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Of these, 696 deaths were attributed to the DPT vaccine – more deaths than any other vaccine.

Lea Thompson_NBC

“Her Peabody Award-winning “RX for Death” was an investigation into doctors’ office errors that caused unnecessary surgery and death. It helped bring about the Medical Laboratory Improvement Act of 1988. Her National Emmy winning investigation of children who were harmed by the DPT vaccine helped bring about the passage of the Vaccine Compensation Act of 1987, as well as the use of a new DPT vaccine in this country. The Infant Formula Act of 1980 followed Thompson’s testimony before Congress about her discovery that some children suffered brain damaged from their baby formulas.”

High Potency Measles Experiments Conducted Mostly on Black Babies Without Informed Consent

CDC and Johns Hopkins University scientists, assisted by Kaiser Permanente, enrolled 1500 six month old black and Hispanic babies in Los Angeles in an experiment (1990-1991) to test vaccine-induced antibodies using the high potency Edmonston Zagreb (EZ) measles vaccine. The experiment was halted in October 1991 after CDC and the WHO had received numerous reports from EZ trial sites in Africa that baby girls were dying in high numbers within six months to three years after vaccination.[xix]

An investigation by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) of the experiment in Los Angeles found that informed consent requirements had been violated. Parents had not been informed that their babies would be vaccinated with an unlicensed vaccine. CDC and Kaiser denied any babies were harmed – which does not ameliorate the ethical violation. In 1996, Johns Hopkins researchers reported in the Journal of Infectious Diseases that infants with the highest antibody responses to high titer measles vaccine have the most profound immune suppression.[xx]

Measles Outbreaks Have Occurred in BOTH Vaccinated & Unvaccinated Children

This raises legitimate questions about just how effective the MMR is. Vaccine promoters – manufacturers, pharmaceutical investors, public officials, professionals in positions of authority, and a hired band of strident Astroturf bloggers – invoke the specter of deadly measles outbreaks that (they claim) would follow if vaccination rates go down. The empirical evidence refutes the specter of deadly measles outbreaks. Indeed, incidence rates remain sufficiently low, prompting the CDC and a panel of experts to conclude (in 2000) that measles has been eliminated in the United States. According to CDC data:[xxi]

Measles incidence has continuously remained below one case per million since 1997. The majority of measles cases were unvaccinated (65%) or had unknown vaccination status (20%). Of the 911 reported measles cases, 372 (40%) were importations (on average 34 importations/year)
In 1999, of 100 cases of measles in the U.S. 33 were imported; 16 had been vaccinated; among U.S. residents 15 (17%) of 86 were vaccinated.”  (CDC Measles – U.S. 1999)

Since 2000, the annual number of reported measles cases in the U.S. ranged from 37 to 220 people. Since 2000, there were no deaths attributed to measles in unvaccinated children in the US or in the UK. A Canadian government report (2004) acknowledged that “despite virtually 100% documented one-dose coverage in some regions large outbreaks of measles involving thousands of cases persisted”. However, in recent years, the two dose MMR vaccination schedule has also been failing, with widespread outbreaks occurring. However, contrary to the demonization of families who decline to vaccinate their children in accordance with government-dictated schedules, measles outbreaks have occurred among those who have received the recommended vaccination doses.

A seldom discussed problem is the waning protection from the vaccine over time. Measles poses particular risk during pregnancies and for infants too young to be vaccinated. Because vaccinated expectant mothers are no longer protected by lifetime immunity from a measles bout as children, they cannot impart their protective immunity to their developing fetus or newborn infants as unvaccinated mothers had done in the past. [xxii]

A spike in measles outbreaks in the U.S. in 2014 was instantly blamed on “anti-vax” parents, on celebrities like Jenny McCarthy, and (invariably) on Andrew Wakefield, whose Lancet article (1998) was described as “the gas that seemingly fueled the anti-vaccination movement for so long.”[xxiii]

  • In 2015, the first measles death in 12 years was reported in the U.S.

The case involved a young adult woman who had been vaccinated as a child. She had multiple underlying health conditions for which she had been taking medications that suppressed her immune system, thereby compromising her ability to fight off infection. The woman did not have a rash, typical of measles when she died. The cause of death was pneumonia, a common complication of numerous infections.[xxiv] At autopsy measles virus was found.

Public health officials and vaccination promoters exploited the case in fear-mongering media propaganda to promote compliance with vaccination policies:

this tragic situation illustrates the importance of immunizing as many people as possible to provide a high level of community protection against measles.” (Fox News) “the woman’s death was a preventable, but predictable, consequence of falling vaccination rates…Measles has surged back in recent years as groups of like-minded parents have opted against fully vaccinating their children.” (USA Today)

Recent examples of “fake news
The following propaganda was disseminated by the CEO of GAVI (Global Vaccine Alliance):

In 1998 immunisation rates plummeted in the UK and cases of measles soared, after research [by Andrew Wakefield] was published falsely claiming that the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine caused autism. Despite the mountains of scientific evidence to the contrary, many people are buying into it. As a result immunization levels have fallen to dangerous levels across Europe and North America, leading to outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease.”

GAVI is an international consortium that calls itself “a private-public health partnership”. It is funded entirely by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and was founded in 2000, the same year as the Gates Foundation. Its members include the WHO (10% of whose budget is bankrolled by the Gates Foundation, more than supplied by the U.S. government), UNICEF, the World Bank (“a key partner in and fiduciary agent for Gavi’s innovative finance mechanisms”) and the vaccine industry in both industrialized and developing countries.

M & B Gates with Child prop

Melinda and Bill Gates

The Enormous Financial And Political Sphere Of Influence Wielded By The Gates Foundation On Vaccine Policies Globally Cannot Be Overstated.[xxv]

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation came into being in 2000, just as Microsoft had suffered a disastrous anti-trust lawsuit which deemed Microsoft’s business methods illegal, badly sullying Bill Gates’ reputation.[xxvi] The foundation was a means for Bill Gates to morph his public image from the ruthless Microsoft tycoon who stifled competition by exerting illegal monopolistic control over Windows software, to the most notable philanthropist in the world. Under the guise of philanthropy, the reputation and sphere of influence of an oligarch such as Bill Gates, is vastly enhanced and expanded. Promotional campaigns of “fake news” and self-serving pronouncements of “corporate social responsibility” are widely disseminated and help wash away the unvarnished facts.

Indeed, Bill and Melinda Gates’ pervasive noxious influence on media coverage in the West ensures that the foundation’s business projects in the underdeveloped world –e.g., widespread utilization of vaccines dictated by GAVI, utilization of genetically modified food (GMO) production dictated by Monsanto, and undisclosed Microsoft business ventures, receive favorable coverage.

No Such Thing As a Free Gift: The Gates Foundation and the Price of Philanthropy (2015) by Linsey McGoey, a former adviser to the WHO and a sociology lecturer at the University of Essex, casts a critical eye on “philanthrocapitalism” and on the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. McGoey does not accept the carefully cultivated public relations image that the media portrays of Bill Gates as someone who has metamorphosed from predatory business tycoon into the world’s leading philanthropist whose focus now, is only on doing good by “saving lives”.

McGoey argues that in order to understand his current work as a philanthropist, it is necessary to review Bill Gates’s predatory tactics at Microsoft. For example, one of the tactics at Microsoft was to muzzle reporters who criticized Microsoft. Gates’ managers at Microsoft would blacklist journalists to prevent negative coverage of the company’s business practices. John Dvorak, a columnist for PC Magazine described how Microsoft management maintained a whiteboard listing reporters who were “okay” or “needs work”. Microsoft took steps to have reporters in the “needs work” category fired.

To ensure the foundation received good press, Melinda Gates served on the board of directors of the Washington Post from Sept. 2004 to Nov. 2010; she continues to get wide coverage by using the Post’s megaphone for her opinion pieces. In 2015, perhaps following the publication of McGoey’s book, the Gates Foundation communication office added a new function: “managing reputation risk”.

Another critical view of Gates’ pervasive influence on the media is presented byTechrights.org which exposes corruption in the digital arena:

Bill Gates has bribed a lot of the media over the years. Bill Gates had paid in exchange for propaganda (puff pieces, gagging of Gates’ critics, attacks on Gates’ opponents, competition, etc.), with examples ranging from private entities such as The Guardian to public ones like PBS, NPR, and the BBCthe Bill and Melinda Gates foundation funds the Guardian’s global development site”… Bill Gates bribes the press to promote policy that grants him public funds and gets Microsoft more contracts.

NBC finally admits being part of it. How long has this been going on for? A lot of trend-setting media coverage about Common Core turns out to be directly funded by Gates, who would gain from it through Microsoft and InBloom, a surveillance company that Rupert Murdoch too would gain from.” (Bill Gates Now Bribes NBC in Exchange for Favourable (and Profitable) Coverage, (2014)

Bill Gates & Rupert Murdoch (Techrights.org)

Indeed, the Gates Foundation has infiltrated major areas of public policy: public health policies including vaccination and agriculture policy favoring GMOs (genetically modified food), and public education – all  under the guise of philanthropic largesse. The Huffington Post reported that Gates, In Alliance with Murdoch’s News Corp, Builds a New App for Corporate Education (2011).

Classified government documents leaked by Edward Snowden, revealed the unique, pivotal role played by Microsoft (beginning in 2007) in the massive, nefarious U.S. government internet surveillance program called PRISM. Microsoft denied knowledge of the program and incorporated the following patently false claim in its marketing campaign: “Your privacy is our priority.”  The Guardian reported that government documents reveal that Microsoft became PRISM’s first partner in 2007 and gave the National Security Agency the ability to circumvent its encryption system, intercept Web chats, and gather video.

(Read: Report Indicates More Extensive Cooperation by Microsoft on Surveillance  by James Risen, The New York Times (2013); Microsoft Handed the NSA Access to Encrypted Messages, The Guardian (2013); PRISM: Bill Gates and Rupert Murdoch Collecting Information About Everybody’s Children, Techrights.org (2013)


University of North Carolina Scientists Deliver Results Paid for by the Gates Foundation

Science Daily reported the findings published in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization claiming that: “Vaccines Save 20 Million Lives, $350 billion in Poor Countries Since 2001”:

Vaccination efforts made in the world’s poorest countries since 2001 will have prevented 20 million deaths and saved $350 billion in health-care costs by 2020, according to a new study from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. In addition, the researchers put the broader economic and social value of saving these lives and preventing disabilities at $820 billion.

Researchers led by Sachiko Ozawa, Ph.D., an associate professor at the UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, studied the economic impact of Gavi, the global vaccine alliance launched in 2000 to provide vaccines to children in the world’s poorest countries”.

The Indian Government Ousts the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2017

In 2017, the Gates Foundation was the primary target of India’s decision to ban foreign foundations from funding Indian non-profit health groups in an effort to stop those non-profits from lobbying the government for public health policies that enrich those foreign donors.

“Swadeshi Jagran Manch has accused the Gates Foundation of having a conflict of interest in its efforts to expand immunization in India. The group claims the foundation is connected to pharmaceutical companies [sic] the organization is putting together research detailing its assertion to present to the government and to request government action against the Gates Foundation”. (The New York Times, April, 2017)

The decision to oust the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is justified by the foundation’s ignoble record of human rights abuse, exploitation of poor children in India, and its corrupting influence on government vaccination policy.

“A pattern with external funding [is that] countries are lured into a debt trap. With international funding initiatives the government is made to look foolish, refusing to accept a donation made for the benefit of its people. Once the programme is introduced on the basis of the external funding, overseas support is withdrawn. Poor countries fall for this ploy and vaccines are introduced without the mandatory cost-effectiveness study”. (Lessons From the Polio Campaign, Jacob Puliyel, MD, The Hindu) [Read Appendix 9 Betrayal of Public Trust]

The Gates Foundation funded unethical, non-consensual HPV vaccine trials, conducted on unwitting school children in rural districts in India in 2009–2010. Merck’s Gardasil 9 vaccine was tested on 16,000 children, and GlaxoSmithKline’s Cervarix was tested on 14,000 tribal children. In both cases the children were used as human guinea pigs without parental consent and without their knowledge. There were serious adverse events, including seven deaths.

“This was not philanthropy”

Whistleblower Dr Anand Rai, 37

The case was brought to light by a 37-year old whistleblower, Dr. Anand Rai, “who lifted the lid on the scandal of illegal drug [] trials” in India. Dr. Rai, the DailyMail reported, “has been given an armed guard to protect him.”

The case was investigated by the Indian Health Ministry (2011) The trials were conducted by an American company (Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH). Science magazine reported that:

“the Indian health ministry report in 2011 noted that the trial on several occasions failed to obtain proper informed consent of participants. It also revealed that trial managers did not set up a mechanism for reporting any adverse effects, and it criticized the lack of a control group and the trial’s inclusion of girls from India’s protected tribal communities without gaining individual consent. The trial did not comply and meet standards of good clinical practice”.

An all-party parliamentary committee issued a report on August 30th 2013, in which it blasted both PATH and the Indian Council on Medical Research (ICMR):

“for failing to have conducted postmortem examinations of the7 girls who died during the trial. And it levels an astonishing allegation: Rather than endeavoring to protect women’s health, PATH, it charged, was a willing tool of foreign drug companies hoping to convince the Indian government to include the HPV vaccine in its universal vaccine program, a roster of mandatory immunizations that the government is required to pay for”.

Chandra Gulhati, editor of the influential journal Monthly Index of Medical Specialties stated: “This was not philanthropy.” And Samiran Nundy, a gastrointestinal expert and editor emeritus of the National Medical Journal of India said: “This is an obvious case where Indians were being used as guinea pigs”.

Two years later, the case was heard by the Indian Supreme Court.

The MailOnline investigation uncovered claims that children as young a nine suffered side-effects after being used as unwitting human guinea pigs. The judges expressed frustration that the country’s government had failed to provide answers to what had happened during the earlier trials of the original Gardasil and Cervarix. [The judges] wanted to know whether there had been any follow-up or monitoring of the girls to see whether they had suffered adverse health consequences. And the judges also ordered the government to produce an opinion on the issue of liability and compensation. 

An investigation by an Indian parliamentary committee had previously concluded that the trials amounted to a serious breach of trust and medical ethics amounting to child abuse and ‘a clear cut violation of the human rights of these girl children and adolescents’. They say that a ‘study’ carried out for the foundation by a US organisation was in fact an illegal drugs trial.”

The government’s failure to act following the parliamentary committee report demonstrates the corrupting influence of the Gates Foundation which had bought government officials.

Another example of an ill-conceived initiative funded by the Gates Foundation, one that resulted in at least 47,500 children to be paralyzed was the polio eradication campaign.

After years of controversy, the use of an oral polio vaccine was replaced in the Western world by an injected, inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). In the United States, the use of oral polio vaccine (OPV) was discontinued in 2000 due to its proven link with vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV), and in the UK it was discontinued circa 2004.

Why then, was the oral polio vaccine aggressively promoted in India and other poor developing countries by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Bill Gates administers oral polio vaccine in India, 2015; http://dhanjitvadra.com/

The worst part of the tragic consequences of the Gates’ widely promoted campaign is that the risk of paralysis caused by the oral polio vaccines was known to scientists the world over. It was known to officials of the WHO, and it was surely known to Bill and Melinda Gates. This vital information about the risk of permanent paralysis, however, was concealed from the population that the Gates Foundation sought to vaccinate with the “blessing” of officials of the WHO.

In 2013, a statement by the WHO claims: “The small risk of cVDPV pales in significance to the tremendous public health benefits associated with OPV [polio].

“While that risk may be statistically negligible from the bureaucratic point of view of the United Nations and agenda-driven philanthropy, the vaccine-derived paralysis has ruined at least 47,500 real human lives in India, in children who would have likely never contracted paralyzing polio but instead were paralyzed and permanently harmed by the so-called “cure” – all while an alternate vaccine not linked with paralysis has long been available” (TruthMedia).

The findings of the National Polio Surveillance Project, which is available online, were published in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics. The findings revealed that rates of non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) have increased 1200% since the oral polio vaccine was introduced to India a decade ago.

[Read more about Gates’ self-serving, underhanded business-philanthropic practices and the Foundation’s conflicts of interest in Counter Punch (2016), and AHRP: Weapons Of Mass Deception: False Claims, Corrupted Science; Betrayal of Public Trust & Institutional Corruption]

The Real Concern of Bill & Melinda Gates & the Other Vaccine Stakeholders

The uppermost concern for vaccine stakeholders is the financial threat posed by the increasing number of people – including parents as well as informed healthcare professionals — who refuse to comply with corporate influenced, government-dictated vaccination policies.

In 2016, the AAP conducted a survey[xxvii]of 600 pediatricians. The study found that in 2013, 87% had encountered parents who refused to vaccinate, a substantial increase from 2006 when 75% had refused to vaccinate.  Pediatricians reported that the percentage of parents who refuse some vaccines almost doubled between 2006 and 2013.

TABLE 3: Pediatrician Impressions of Parental Reasons for Vaccine Delays 2013
Parental Reason                                               2013 Delays (n= 516),   %a

Discomfort to the child of having too many shots at 1 time                       75.0
Too many vaccines are a burden on the child’s immune system               72.5
Safety or concerns about adverse side effects, other than autism or          56.8
Concern about autism                                                                           53.9
Baby is too small                                                                                  42.1
Believe immunizations are unnecessary                                                 25.6
Concern about thimerosal                                                                     22.7
Philosophical opposition to immunizations                                             20.4
Mistrust of pharmaceutical industry, government advisory groups,          18.0
or physician organizations
Too costly to pay for multiple vaccinations                                              5.8
                                                                             Pediatrics 2016

The authors’ conclusion:

“From the perspective of pediatricians, parents who delay vaccines may do so because of concern for their child’s discomfort and concern about immune system burden, whereas vaccine refusers are more likely to believe that vaccines are unnecessary.

  • Evidence that an increased number of parents refuse to vaccinate their children has prompted governments in Australia, Italy, France, and California to adopt of compulsory vaccination policies, eliminating exemptions (supposedly) to protect the community by ensuring so-called “herd immunity”. However, these state policies violate a fundamental human right and parental obligation to choose what’s best for their child.
  • Not so long ago, eugenicists in the U.S. and Western Europe enacted forced sterilization policies to protect civilization and the “purity of the racial gene pool”.
    [Read: American Eugenics Research – Racism Masquerading as “Science”]

The following examples provide a glimpse into the abusive tactics of intimidation being used to dissuade honest scientists from pursuing independent vaccine safety research.

“Recently, the authors of many vaccine safety investigations are being personally criticized rather than the actual science being methodologically assessed and critiqued. Unfortunately, this could result in making vaccine safety science a “hazardous occupation”.(Yehuda Shoenfeld, Vaccine, 2017)

Dr. Brian Hooker’s peer-reviewed published reanalysis of the full CDC dataset underlying the Frank DeStefano report in Pediatrics (2004) was published in Translational Neurodegeneration (2014). The reanalysis included the data that had been deleted from the published Pediatrics article was provided by its co-author, Dr. William Thompson, a senior CDC scientist who blew the whistle with documentation that revealed the shocking actions by CDC officials. They concealed (according to Dr. Thompson, they destroyed) the evidence of an MMR-autism risk for African American male babies.

Dr. Hooker’s re-analysis – including the data that had been concealed from the published report in Pediatrics – showed that the MMR posed a significant increased 3.6 relative risk (i.e., 360% increased risk) of autism for African American baby boys if vaccinated prior to age 24 months.

Dr. Hooker’s independent re-analysis of the contested CDC study and the testimony of a senior CDC scientist who corroborated the fact that CDC scientists had deliberately falsified the evidence presented a major problem for vaccine stakeholders. They solved the problem by pressuring the journal to remove the re-analysis from its website, and by convincing the major media to ignore the entire issue of CDC fraud, lest the evidence of an MMR risk “scare” the public into not vaccinating their children.25 [L’Affaire Wakefield]

[i] Doctors Want to Bar Anti-Vaccination Campaigner Sherri Tenpenny, Julia Medew, Sydney Morning Herald, January 2015

[ii] Profile of a ‘Passionate Vaccine Advocate’, Celeste McGovern, Ghost Ship Media, October 15, 2017

[iii] CDC, HPV-Associated Cancer Diagnosis by Age

[iv]  Most Editors of Top Medical Journals Receive Industry Payements,  Retraction Watch, Nov. 8, 2017

[v]  Evidence was also gathered in the course of a criminal investigation of Dr. Poul Thorsen by the U.S. Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Two Prominent Vaccine “Experts” Exposed (2011);   Examples of collusion by CDC scientists, and CDC officials who concealed the risk posed by thimerosal in vaccines administered to infants. Betrayal of Public Trust & Institutional Corruption: Vaccine Safety Ratings & Vaccine Science Falsified

[vi] A bitter international dispute erupted about the ownership of the HIV patent. Dr. Robert Gallo, formerly with the National Cancer Institute insisted that he had discovered the HIV virus, but the virus was sent to Gallo by the Pasteur Instituted headed by Dr. Montagnier. The issue was not just a matter of prestige; the financial stakes in the patent were enormous. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services filed the AIDS test patent.

[vii] Dispute Behind Nobel Prize for HIV Research, Robert Bazell, NBC News, 2008. Dr. Gallo was found “guilty of misrepresentation in reporting his research and that his supervision of his research lab had been desultory” by the Office of Research Integrity (1993). Science Fictions by John Crewdson, 2002 is a forensic analysis showing that both Gallo, in his lab at the NIH, and Robin Weiss, at the Chester Beatty lab in London, received samples of Montagnier’s virus in 1983, and that later both men claimed independently that they themselves had discovered a virus in AIDS patients. Genetic sequencing later revealed that in both instances what they had discovered was actually Montagnier’s virus, which had been mixed in their own cultures. Both governments attempted to end the dispute with proceeds from the patent shared 50-50 by both.

[viii] Luc Montagnier, Nobel Prize Winner, Takes Homeopathy Seriously, Dana Ullman, Huffington Post, 2011

[ix] French Nobelist Escapes ‘Intellectual Terror’ to Pursue Radical Ideas in China, Martin Ensernick, Science, 2010

[x] Nature reported that Robert Gallo, head of the Institute of Human Virology at the University of Maryland, wrote to the Chantal Biya International Reference Centre in Yaoundé, severing his institute’s ties to IRCCB. Richard Roberts, a Nobel-prize winner in molecular biology, who is the chief scientific officer of New England Biolabs, a biotech research and development company that commercializes DNA genomic products, initiated a letter against Dr. Montagnier, signed by 9 Nobel laureates. Nobel Fight Over African HIV Centre, Declan Butler, Nature, 2012

[xi] Trial Draws Fire: Nobel Laureate To Test Link Between Autism And Infection , Declan Butler, Nature, 2010

[xii] Read the detailed facts gathered by a Congressional investigation by the Committee on Government Reform, whose 49 page report, Conflicts in Vaccine Policy (2000), documenting the collusion that led to rotavirus vaccine fiasco, including Dr. Offit’s dubious votes on the ACIP

[xiii]  J.B. Handley’s overview of Dr. Offit’s ignoble role, Dr. Paul Offit: Fox in a Henhouse, the ACIP Years (1998-2003)  posted on Age of Autism, 2009

[xiv] Addressing Parents’ Concerns: Do Multiple Vaccines Overwhelm or Weaken the Infant’s Immune System? Paul Offit, Jessica Quarles, Michael Gerber et al, Pediatrics, 2002

[xv] The Unofficial Vaccine Educators: Are CDC Funded Non-Profits Sufficiently Independent? Peter Doshi, BMJ, November 2017. Doshi updates Sharyl Attisson’s report on CBC News, How Independent Are Vaccine Defenders? CBS, 2008

[xvi] Big Pharma’s Faking a “Grass-Roots” Campaign to Keep Jenny McCarthy Off “The View” by Steve Schneider, News from Underground, 2013

[xvii] CDC is a Vaccine Company That Owns 56 Vaccine Patents – A Grave Conflict of Interest, Kelli Gordon, New York News Today; Truth Uncensored.net, Nov. 6, 2017

[xviii] Deaths Following Vaccination: What Does The Evidence Show? Elaine R. Miller,a Pedro L. Moro,a Maria Cano,a and Tom Shimabukuro, Vaccine, 2015;

[xix]In Haiti, infants were given the experimental vaccine at 10 to 500 times the usual dose levels…” The Vaccine Reaction, Barbara Loe Fisher, National Vaccine Information Center, June 1996

[xx] The Effect of Edmonston-Zagreb and Schwarz Measles Vaccines on Immune Responses in Infants. Gregory D. Hussey Elizabeth A. Goddard Jane Hughes Judith J. Ryon Mustaphah Kerran Edgar Carelse Peter M. Strebel Lauri E. Markowitz John Moodie Peter Barron Zainub Latief Rauoff Sayed David Beatty Diane E. Griffin, The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1996

[xxi] CDC Measles – U.S. 1999; CDC Survey Manual;  CDC Measles Update: Measles – U.S. Jan. – July 2008; See also, Cases and Outbreaks 2008 – 2017; CDC Measles Data and Statistics, 2016; One death was reported in 2015, US Sees First Measles Death In 12 Years.

[xxii] The Untold Story of Measles, Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post, 2014

[xxiii] How the U.S. Went From Eliminating Measles to a Measles Outbreak at Disneyland, Mark Berman, The Washington Post, 2015

[xxiv] US Sees First Measles Death In 12 Years, National Public Radio, 2015; Woman Who Died Of Measles WAS Vaccinated, Daily Mail, 2016.

[xxv]The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funds the Guardian’s global development site. The Guardian Sets Up a Nonprofit to Support Its Journalism By Amie Tsang, The New York Times, Aug. 28, 2017;

[xxvi] Millions for Defense, New York Times review of two books covering the Microsoft Antitrust Trial in 2000 that badly sullied Bill Gates’ reputation.  Pride Before the Fall by John Heilmann; World War 3.0 by Ken Auletta.

[xxvii] Vaccine Delays, Refusals, and Patient Dismissals: A Survey of Pediatricians, Catherine Hough-Telford, David W. Kimberlin, Inmaculada Aban, William P. Hitchcock, Jon Almquist, Richard Kratz, Karen G. O’Connor, Pediatrics, 2016